MtthsMlw wrote: ↑05 Mar 2020, 22:22
PlatinumZealot wrote: ↑05 Mar 2020, 18:54
How much kW was the MGUH estimated at again?
~80kW has been a common estimate.
It’s one I’ve used myself and was “confirmed” when Andy Cowell suggested the max discharge on the ES at 200kW.
Looking at anti lag if we assume the assembly has to be accelerated from 50000 rpm to 100000 rpm then I estimate the energy required at 26kJ.
If the acceleration is effected by the MGU-H at 80kW it would take 330msec. Which seems too slow. The MGU-H might possibly do short durations at 200kW, the ES limit, in which case the time would be 130msec. Whatever the time this method would consume 0.25MJ if used just 10 times in a lap.
If the acceleration came from fuel driving the turbine, there is sufficient energy in 0.6g of fuel. If this were burned in one Max fuel cycle, at say 8000rpm, the overall efficiency of the turbine output would need to be 20%, which seems quite doable. At 50% efficiency they would need to burn only 0.25g of fuel. It looks as though anti lag using a single firing of a jet turbine, bang, might be quite an efficient strategy if the componentry can survive it.
Fortune favours the prepared; she has no favourites and takes no sides.
Truth is confirmed by inspection and delay; falsehood by haste and uncertainty : Tacitus